The Manning times. [volume] (Manning, Clarendon County, S.C.) 1884-current, 1887-11-09

Facts AID Opinions Which Ccnine:it
Themselves 70 Serious Consideration
Work Of the Legislature.
(Keowee Courier-Editorial)
We have read with some interest, bu
with more surprise, the views OF some O
our leading lawyers On the defects OF ths
criminal law, and the escape OF guilty
criminals thereby, as the cause for thf
frequency and gravity o; crimes. They
propose changes in a system whsch hai
met the approval of an enlightened cen
tury and advocate them as remedy
against lynch law and the alleged p:ey.'
lenee of crime. We cannot hope, IN
single article, to point out al the falls'
cies in the studied articles Of these dis
singuished writers, but Will briefly al
lude to hesaIent points of error, which,
in our view, they contain.
Before entering on the subject, we vii.
state that our views Of the criminal Ia"
have always been the reverse OF taose ea'
pressed in the articles named, and wnen
in the Legislature We suggested caan Sc
in the law, which would give the deieno'
ant in criminal prosecutions the reply II
argument in sill cases. We Thought :aen,
ana still believe, persons charged with
crime are put on trial at a great e!saa-
vantage. It is true, that in theory every
man IS presumed to be innocent until he
Is proved guilty, but in practice, the cor
pus delich being established, every per-
son charged with crime IS supposed to
be guilty. This results from our nature.
All honest men have Natural antpathy
to crime, as affecting injDrioasly, either
directly or indirectly, the security. OF
their persons, propurty and repusatlon,
and from this fact the mere charge Of g
crime against an individual Leads the
public mind in the channel OF guilt. AS
q consequence every individual charged
with crime must meet and deteas tbs
natural inclination, either by p-ooI OF
past good character or direct proof O;
Innocence. This position needs DO i;!ns-
sration of its truth, for when We read or
hesr of any cruel or heinocs crime, siEees
ing life or property, or even the .epusa.,
tion OF 8 female, and q party IS arrested
for it, We hear the cry, hang NM, ne
ought to be strung up without L." or
gospel. Not few instances have oc.
Cured where this feeling has calniinatei'
in the summary execution OF the Alleged
criminal without inquiry as to, or proof
of, guilt. .
This characteristic OF our Iat1ic is
doubtless the father OF the right o. de
seadant in capital cases to challenge per
emptorily twenty jurors. he nas, aoo
should hage, the right Of t1ial by q Iery
composed of calm, uninpassioned men,
freefom any bias or prejudice against
him or his counsel or the crane Itself, for
there is sa innate prejudice agains5 c1lsne
which it is difficult for any of US 20 ao-
straet from the person charged with the
crime. This right of challenge IS neither
designed nor does it operate SIS right to
select s Jury, and we do not think 1t
should be abridged, being IN Itself wise
and having stood the test OF century.
Again, in theory the State hes Only the
tight of reply, but in practice this E.eAns
Che right to sit with closed mouth until
tbs defence has opened out It's whole
casa, an5 then in one argument both to
reply to defendant and pile up the points
Cor the State. We have heard cases
where q practiced solicitor by g pointed
anecdote OF appropriate parable has VIZ
tually aissipsted the argument for the
6sfence, and then, with track cleared,
has applied facts and circumstances
pointing to guilt, which by reply could
haye been scattered in turn. The Judge
not being allowed, and properly, too, to
charge on the facts, the handling of them
by an experienced solicitor goes fresh to
sie jury. In this, the defendant IS az
Disadvantage, IS 10 lawyer is Ignorant o;
The advantage of the reply, which II
criminal cases, in practice, Is both the
argument for the State and the reply to
the defendant.
Again. defendants IN criminal eases
are generally poor men, often ignorant
.lso. and neither know nor are pecunla-
rily able to employ efficient counsel. In
capital cases young counsel are generally
aonointed to defend them, who have
mads 10 preparation and have no eSpec'
tstiep of reward. The State, on the con-
trsry, is rich and powerful. 1t not only
ssisries and employs eminent counsel,
bns swyers, who otter hsye had years
OF experience in the prosecution OF cam
insls. They have the criminal saE 81
Their tongues enc and are not only'ready
in argument, but well posted on sii qnes
lions of doubtful testimony. IN tnls
too, defendants sre at great disadvant
age.
Again, in theory the State asks tht
conviction Of no innocent man, bus Il
practice, from the ve:y nature OF the ie
eal profession and from the fact thst IL
all cases sent ND for trial, the State has
pe:ua facie case, solicitors, as ro!c
thozah not intending it, prosecute 10:
conviction and present IN the s.rooges
light every fact pointing to or bearing o;
guilt. True, in olden times the defend
ant in criminal cases vas Showed TX
counsel, bat then the Queens couose
presented all tbs facts, pro aid con-, anf
lett the case 20 the Sary. Now there az
two sides in every case, crila;oel as ws;
as civil, and the contest Is for Ts:!iic
of guilty on one side sid not gully o.
the other, each attorney acraSlne III
facts OF his side TO the best Of his ah:;lt.
This is the practice, and il saa s:r@Gst:
of the State and the experioace ot Il
counsel, the defendant is at z &iss::raG;
Again, the law says it is bs::=: The
many guilty should escape than shat on